Well, not the survey but here is a list of what took place and why people should *always* invest in a good survey. Parcel 'A" of the 1962 LSM is the subject.
1. The title insurer did not search the public records of Glendale, they missed this LSM (Lot Split Map). Thier legal is contrary to the map that created Parcel 'A' of the 1962 LSM and most likely on the other parcels shown as well. I was told by a title officer many years ago that the records of incorporated cities are never searched, just what is in the county recorders.
2. The original buyer of Parcel 'A' built the wall without benefit of a survey.
3. The owner of Parcel 'B' of the 1962 map built the garage without benefit of a survey.
4. City inspectors cleared both the wall and the garage for lot line clearance when they were built.
5. The architect for Parcel 'B' most likely positioned the fairly new garage that serves Parcel 'B' on his plan by showing the concrete wall as being PL.
6. The architect for Parcel 'A' blew it. The house wall is *almost* on the east sideline of Parcel 'A'. House is not shown on the map.
7. The owners of Parcel 'A' did not get a survey before closing escrow...such a shame that people do that.
I guess I could go on, but that's enough of that.
The wall has been in place since the people I did this for took possession in 1995.
The garage was built sometime after that, but never contested as to it's location.
Parcel 'A' has been paying taxes on the 300 sq. ft.
Parcel 'A' and 'B" will NOT be able to do a lot line adjustment because the street frontage is less than 100 feet. This asinine ruling is due to the planning directors interpetation of the states subdivision map act. He *believes* that the adjustment of a lot line is creating a NEW lot. So, no lot line adjustment for these folks as long as he sits on the throne.
I do not know why these jobs find me, but they do. All I was to do on this site was to give a sideyard clearance letter for the spa (still under construction). The plans show a 7 ft setback for the west ( it's 6.7 ft ) and a 4 ft set back for the north ( it's 10.8 ft ).
That is an asinine ruling, but I've heard it before. Most reasonable planning departments will allow an existing non-conforming lot to be adjusted if you're not making the non-conformity worse. What are they going to do about it if they can't adjust the boundary?
Steven
I guess this could go a few ways.
1. Garage gets cut back and wall gets repositioned.
2. Parcel 'B' tries to get a prescriptive easement.
3. Parcel 'A' sells an easement to Parcel 'B' with a clause that 'B' is has to pay back to Parcel 'A' an amount for the prorated taxes for the 300 sq ft less ten dollars.
4. Parcel 'A' just throws in the towel.
Steven
Sounds like a deal breaker.
So, just wash it out, and hide the encroachment, and bla bla bla.
(I have actually seen that!)
🙂
N
Parcel A and Parcel B could get together and remove the obstruction in the planning office. Actually a very good solution for many people other than the obstruction.
a simple Easement.
personal, perpetual, time limited... dealers choice
take public control out of the picture and keep them out.
Variance request; it can be enforced by a court order by basing the claim on ss 322 as the condition has been in place longer than 5 yrs and there has been no public interest harmed.
File copies of the initial variation request with both the elected municipal representative and the attorney for the municipality asking the rep & attorney to describe how any public interest is involved.
Richard Schaut
